Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Sandusky update (more evidence against Joe P)

Buffnik said:
Field would definitely matter. I'm in business. People care whether I make money for companies, not whether I took a women's studies course seriously when I was 19.
Click to expand...
I care, did you take your women's studies course seriously?:lol:
 
leftybuff said:
Sadly, and I think I mentioned this before, these sort of incidents often are not the act of an isolated pervert. I have believed all along Sandusky was protected by people who had the same proclivities, and who had money, political power, or perhaps political office. Many years ago I read "The Franklin Cover-Up" by former Nebraska legislator John DeCamp. It has been a long time since I read it but he made some oblique reference to Pennsylvania, and, apparently, a connection to what amounted to a child prostitution ring there in NE. I don't remember the exact reference, and I haven't gone back to look at the book. But here is a link to some more recent stuff, ask yourself why this young man's testimony isn't center stage.

http://americanfreepress.net/?p=5116
Click to expand...


We don't go there in American media anymore, in spite of billowing smoke there is no fire, doesn't happen here.

The day of the investigative reporter is gone, history, no mas.

Sandusky Story Getting Weirder, FBI is Reportedly Investigating Child Porn Ring

snip

It’s getting weirder. Late last week, reports from CBS News and Radar Online said that the FBI and US Postal Service are investigating Jerry Sandusky for being part of a child porn ring that sent letters and photos across state lines.
From those reports:
CBS:
CBS News has learned that at the end of 2011, allegations were forward by the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. that Sandusky used the mails to seduce individuals to cross state lines for sexual purposes, with trips and gifts offered. Investigators are looking at 6-7 victims who might have gotten letters.
​
Radar Online:
Both the FBI and a criminal investigative division of the United States Postal Service are looking into the possible existence of a pedophile ring that involved Sandusky sharing boys with other men connected to Penn State. Sandusky was recently convicted on 45 counts of child sexual abuse.
“Investigators have interviewed at least one man who claims to have knowledge of Sandusky and a very prominent man, with strong ties to Penn State, both sexually abusing a boy,” a source familiar with the situation told RadarOnline.com.
“The new investigation is also looking at if boys from the Second Mile charity were shared by Sandusky with other men,” the source told RadarOnline.com. “The name of at least one very rich and powerful man connected to the university has come up in this new investigation.”
​
Radar Online is a Hollywood gossip site, so their reliability is somewhat questionable (though they have broken several legitimate stories and have a partnership with ABC News). CBS News points out that none of Sandusky’s victims have indicated they were shared with other men.
Today, Radar Online added to the story:
A witness interviewed by federal authorities in the widening Penn State investigation claims he saw Jerry Sandusky and one of the school's prominent boosters sexually abusing boys on a private plane, RadarOnline.com is reporting exclusively.
That man, who has a strong tie to the booster he is accusing, says that Sandusky and the booster abused two boys on a private plane in Pennsylvania, a source close to the situation tells RadarOnline.com exclusively.
"The witness doesn't know if the boys are victims who have already been identified or not," the source told Radar. "He claims it happened on a private plane, with no pilot or crew around and that he was an eyewitness.
"His claim is being taken seriously by investigators. They have already asked another man who is connected to one of the victims if he knew anything about this. And they are following up with other potential witnesses."
​
Back in November, Pittsburgh radio host and columnist (also, loud-mouthed blowhard) Mark Madden told radio stations a similar tale involving a child sex ring. That assertion, though somewhat wild at the time, was given some credibility, if only because in April, 2011, Madden forecasted what was about to happen at Penn State in frightening detail.
The child porn ring wasn’t mentioned again until the reports from CBS and Radar last week.
One man, Greg Bucceroni, added some fuel to this fire when he commented on a Daily Collegian story (Penn State student paper), saying that he was abused from 1977-1980 by a prominent Philadelphia businessman Ed Savitz, who introduced him to Sandusky. Savitz died of AIDs in 1993 while awaiting trial for illicit sexual contact with teenage boys.
In her five-part series about The Second Mile, Patriot-News reporter Sara Ganim downplayed Bucceroni’s assertions, incorrectly writing that he claimed on the Daily Collegian’s website that he was abused by Sandusky. He didn’t (at least that I could fine). He wrote that he was introduced to Sandusky by Savitz, hinting at the existence of a so-called child porn ring in which young boys were shared for sex.
 
In response to Waldo's post:

I seriously doubt that a fraction of Sandusky's victims have been identified, the identified victims in the criminal trial are likely to be only the tip of the iceberg. In addition it wouldn't surprise me if it is eventually found out that a number of the unidentified victims have already been paid off, threatened, or both to insure their silence if others are involved.

The situation with the dead assistant DA as well as this information regarding the Postal Service and FBI investigations would certainly seem to lead to other persons involved who would have the money, connections, and willingness to do what is neccessary to attempt to silence other victims.

If a booster has enough money to have a private plane at his disposal he has enough at stake to do some things to protect himself that most of us would never imagine. To be convicted of being a pedophile is enough to turn someone who is wealthy and powerful into an inmate without financial resources.
 
The Creep is writing another book in prison.


Fark.com asked its readers for suggestions for the title ... some of them are pretty funny, despite the sordid nature of the whole situation.
 
MtnBuff said:
In response to Waldo's post:

I seriously doubt that a fraction of Sandusky's victims have been identified, the identified victims in the criminal trial are likely to be only the tip of the iceberg. In addition it wouldn't surprise me if it is eventually found out that a number of the unidentified victims have already been paid off, threatened, or both to insure their silence if others are involved.

The situation with the dead assistant DA as well as this information regarding the Postal Service and FBI investigations would certainly seem to lead to other persons involved who would have the money, connections, and willingness to do what is neccessary to attempt to silence other victims.

If a booster has enough money to have a private plane at his disposal he has enough at stake to do some things to protect himself that most of us would never imagine. To be convicted of being a pedophile is enough to turn someone who is wealthy and powerful into an inmate without financial resources.
Click to expand...


Conspiracy theories regarding the elite members of society using children for all types of abominable activities is nothing new as Lefty's post above has pointed out.
 
Waldo said:
Conspiracy theories regarding the elite members of society using children for all types of abominable activities is nothing new as Lefty's post above has pointed out.
Click to expand...

1001sacwelcome.jpg
 
Well, I know it sounds far fetched. But if one cares to look into it, there is a disturbing amount of information out there about the topic. Pederasty, institutional and otherwise, is at least as old as Sparta....
 
SuperiorBuff said:
Isn't this a case where any proceeds from the book can be distributed between the victims?
Click to expand...


Mmmmm ... probably not (unfortunately).

"SON OF SAM" LAWS
Laws that enable a state to use the proceeds a criminal earns from recounting his or her crime in a book, movie, television show, or other depiction. The laws are named after David Berkowitz, a New York serial killer who left a note signed "Son of Sam" at the scene of one of his crimes.

Since 1977 forty-two states and the federal government have enacted various types of Son of Sam laws that take any proceeds a criminal earns for selling the story of his crime and give them to the victims of the crime or to a victims' compensation fund. Since a 1991 U.S. Supreme Court ruling struck down the New York law as unconstitutional, states have sought ways to modify their laws to avoid similar decisions. Despite the apparent virtue of denying criminals the ability to profit from their crimes, serious First Amendment issues have been raised about Son of Sam laws.

The New York legislature enacted the first Son of Sam law (N.Y. Exec. Law § 632-a) in 1977 after it learned that David Berkowitz was planning to sell his story of serial killing. The statute affected an accused or convicted person who contracted to speak or write about her crime. It required the person contracting with the criminal to turn over the criminal's proceeds to the state's Crime Victims Compensation Board, which established an escrow account for the benefit of the crime's victims and publicized the existence of the account. To obtain funds, a victim had to bring a civil action and obtain a judgment against the criminal within three years (originally five years) of the establishment of the account. At the end of this time period, the criminal received any funds in the account upon showing that no actions were pending against her.

Forty-one other states adopted similar laws, and the federal government established such a process in the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 3681–3682). In a few states, victims may apply directly to a victims' compensation program rather than sue the criminal directly. Some states seek to prevent criminals from ever profiting from their crimes by retaining any money remaining in the escrow account at the end of the statutory period. Under the federal statute, a court directs the disposition of the remaining funds and may require that part or all of the money be turned over to the Federal Crime Victims Fund.

The constitutionality of the New York Son of Sam law was challenged in Simon and Schuster, Inc. v. New York Victims Crime Board, 502 U.S. 105, 112 S. Ct. 501, 116 L. Ed. 2d 476 (1991). This case involved profits from the book Wiseguy: A Life in a Mafia Family, a nonfiction work about Organized Crime in New York City, published by Simon and Schuster. Nicholas Pileggi wrote the book with the paid cooperation of Henry Hill, a career criminal who agreed in 1980 to testify against organized crime figures. The book told Hill's life story from 1955, when he first became involved with crime, until 1980.

Simon and Schuster argued that the law was based on the content of a publication and therefore violated the First Amendment. The Court agreed. Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor struck down the law, concluding, "A statute is presumptively inconsistent with the First Amendment if it imposes a financial burden on speakers because of the content of their speech."
The Son of Sam law singled out income derived from expressive activity and was directed only at works having a specified content. Because of the financial disincentive to publication that the act created, and its differential treatment among authors, the Court applied the strictest form of review to the New York law. The Court acknowledged that the state had a compelling interest in compensating victims from the fruits of crime but concluded that the law was not narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. The New York law was over-inclusive, applying to works on any subject as long as the work expressed the author's thoughts or recollections about the crime, however tangentially or incidentally. If the author admitted to committing the crime, it did not matter whether she was ever actually accused or convicted. Under this standard, works by St. Augustine, Henry David Thoreau, and Malcolm X would be covered because their writings discussed crimes that they committed.

The Simon and Schuster decision has put the validity of all Son of Sam laws in doubt. New York quickly amended its law to apply to any economic benefit to the criminal derived from the crime, not just the proceeds from the sale of the offender's story. This redefinition was intended to eliminate the unconstitutional regulation of expressive activity and reconceptualize the law as a regulation of economic proceeds from crime.

The Supreme Court did not strike down all Son of Sam laws as unconstitutional, yet states have followed New York in modifying their statutes to designate that all profits of the offender be subject to attachment, not just those derived from selling his crime story. It remains unclear, however, whether these other laws will withstand a First Amendment challenge.
Click to expand...

Since the prospective book will most likely NOT be a recounting of his crimes, but a bunch of excuses for his behavior, I doubt that even the early SOS laws would apply.

If it turns out JS profited from his crimes in any way, e.g., by obtaining funds for pimping out boys to other pedos etc., then the government (state and/or federal) could conceivably seize those assets and distribute them to victims, regardless of whether he writes a book or not. But I doubt JS and his wife will have anything left to seize by the time this all over.
 
leftybuff said:
Well, I know it sounds far fetched. But if one cares to look into it, there is a disturbing amount of information out there about the topic. Pederasty, institutional and otherwise, is at least as old as Sparta....
Click to expand...

Watch it lefty ... Google now has you pegged as a pederast. :huh:
 
L Buff said:
The Creep is writing another book in prison.


Fark.com asked its readers for suggestions for the title ... some of them are pretty funny, despite the sordid nature of the whole situation.
Click to expand...
Writing a book....another piece of evidence indicating he really doesn't even believe he has done anything wrong....
 
yes, we should abandon due process as quickly as possible. Especially since it seems to have failed us in this situation.
 
L Buff said:
Mmmmm ... probably not (unfortunately).

Since the prospective book will most likely NOT be a recounting of his crimes, but a bunch of excuses for his behavior, I doubt that even the early SOS laws would apply.

If it turns out JS profited from his crimes in any way, e.g., by obtaining funds for pimping out boys to other pedos etc., then the government (state and/or federal) could conceivably seize those assets and distribute them to victims, regardless of whether he writes a book or not. But I doubt JS and his wife will have anything left to seize by the time this all over.
Click to expand...

Buffnik said:
Everyone: Unless all the proceeds go to the victims, please do not purchase this thing.
Click to expand...

Maybe Sandusky will be a goodfella and donate the proceeds...
 
The cognitive dissonance of Joe Paterno

Joe Paterno had to be prodded by his family to read the grand jury report regarding Jerry Sandusky and did not understand some of its graphic terminology, according to a new book.

The book, "Paterno" by Joe Posnanski, was purchased Friday by The Associated Press in advance of its release next week.

In the book, Posnanski describes a scene at Paterno's home, two days after Sandusky had been charged with child sex abuse last November. Paterno's family and a close adviser were trying to explain to the Penn State coach that there was a growing sentiment Paterno must have known for years about the accusations against Sandusky.



The book quotes Paterno as shouting "I'm not omniscient!"

Paterno did not want to read the report, but family members and Penn State football communications and marketing assistant Guido D'Elia insisted that he must.

The book also indicates Paterno didn't comprehend all the terms in the report, asking his son what sodomy meant. :rolling_eyes:

According to the book, later that night Paterno's son, Scott, told his mother that she should brace herself for the possibility that Joe could be fired.

Sue Paterno responded, "Scotty, that will kill him."

*******************************************************

Paterno had granted access to Posnanski to write a biography in 2011, well before Sandusky was charged.

"Nobody would argue -- and certainly my book does not argue -- that the good Joe Paterno did in his life should shield him from the horrors of his mistakes," Posnanski wrote in a column for USA Today earlier this week. "Some would argue, especially in the white-hot emotion sparked by the latest revelations, that Paterno's role in the Jerry Sandusky crimes invalidates whatever good he might have done. My book does not argue that either. My book, I believe, lets the reader make up his or her own mind."

The book also details the long and frosty relationship Paterno had with Sandusky while they worked together at Penn State.

According to the book, the two were never friendly and late in Sandusky's tenure, Paterno felt the defense was not performing well and neither was Sandusky.

Paterno did not want to fire Sandusky because he was so popular in the community and with fans, according to the book. The book indicates that Sandusky showed interest in taking an early retirement in 1999, and Paterno encouraged him to do so and let his assistant know he would not be the next head coach at Penn State.

Sandusky and Curley negotiated a retirement package, and among Sandusky's demands was to stay on through the 1999 season.

The book indicates Paterno reluctantly agreed, and then regretted the decision when the team, which was considered one of the national championship favorites going into the season and reached No. 2 in the nation, lost three games late in the year with an underperforming defense.

Sandusky's early retirement at age 55 has led to speculation that a 1998 allegation by a boy against Sandusky that was never prosecuted by authorities led to Penn State quietly pushing Sandusky out.
Paterno told a grand jury he was unaware of that allegation but evidence uncovered by Freeh report investigators suggest that he did.

According to the book, Paterno, who obsessively took and kept handwritten notes, had no notes in his files that mentioned the investigation.
Click to expand...
 
Buffarino said:
He's fighting for his life (and his cornhole). He'll say anything at this point. Nothing to lose and all tht.
Click to expand...

His career is already over, even if all charges were to be dismissed (chances of that are between infintesimally small and none) his name is toxic. Right now his lawyer is simply trying to keep him out of jail and maybe if they hit a home run protect some of his assets from civil liability.

In the end he is very likely, along with Curley and Schultz, to be convicted of felony charges. Based on his "standing in the community" and his lack of a prior record he will likely spend little or no time in jail but the conviction means that the victims will clean out most of what his lawyers haven't already charged him for his defense.
 
buffalocu81 said:
Don't worry. If they put him in general population he most likely will be.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine him ever going to GP. He will spend the rest of his life in some program for sex offenders. That isn't to say that a few of those guys won't avail themselves to his "personal space."
 
McQueary suing PSU under whistleblower statute. You can criticize him for his failure to protect a child and you can criticize him for failing to push the matter when after telling Paterno it was obvious that nothing was happening. That all said he did at least tell Paterno and he was an effective witness for the prosecution.

With all that it is probably fair to say that his career as a high level assistant in a major college program is over and that has nothing to do with his coaching ability.

I would guess that PSU sees this case as another losing proposition. They also don't want to add another layer of bad publicity. I don't think it ever sees a court room. Likely a fairly large settlement with a confidentiality agreement attached.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf-...d--files-4-million-whistleblower-lawsuit.html
 
like I said before - psu is really hurting huh? They are on tv every Saturday and winning games... What punishment is that?? In a couple of years this will all be forgotten and psu will be competing for championships again...probably before CU who got the true death penalty!!
 
BuffUp said:
like I said before - psu is really hurting huh? They are on tv every Saturday and winning games... What punishment is that?? In a couple of years this will all be forgotten and psu will be competing for championships again...probably before CU who got the true death penalty!!
Click to expand...

No. They're gonna be bad in the near future
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top